Disposed

Kuriakose Kp v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Oct 2021WP(C)/16940/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged loan liabilities via writ, claiming a verbal settlement for Rs. 60 lakhs. Lacking evidence, Court rejected the settlement claim but directed the petitioner to submit a proposal to the bank for sympathetic consideration.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach the bank with a suitable settlement proposal; the bank is directed to consider such proposal earnestly.

Kuriakose Kp Vs State of Kerala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 13TH ASWINA, 1943

¶4

WP(C) NO. 16940 OF 2021

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

KURIAKOSE KP AGED 59 YEARS S/O. LATE PAILY K.S., KANDAMKULANGARA HOUSE, MAIKAVE POST, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT-673573. BY ADVS. SAJAN VARGHEESE K. LIJU. M.P

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶9

2 THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, KERALA REGIONAL OFFICE, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001, REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER.

¶10

3 THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH, SBT BHAVAN, PANAMPILLY NAGAR , COCHIN-682036. 4 THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE-3, II FLOOR, JUBILEE BHAVAN, MINI BYPASS ROAD, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE-673006.

¶11

5 THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, KODENCHERRY BRANCH, KODENCHERRY POST, KOZHIKKOSE DISTRICT-673580.

¶12

6 SRI. MURALI, CHIEF MANAGER (CREDIT), STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE-3, KOZHIKODE-673020. BY ADV S.EASWARAN

¶13

W.P.(C)No.16940 of 2021

¶14

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C)No.16940 of 2021

¶17

¶18

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶19

W.P.(C)No.16940 of 2021

¶20

Dated this the 5^th day of October, 2021

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Petitioner seeks for a direction to the respondents to accept balance amount of Rs.31 lakhs along with interest and relieve the petitioner from liabilities of the loan taken from the second respondent, bank.

¶23

Petitioner claims that pursuant to a total loan of Rs. 54 lakhs availed from the second respondent, petitioner had repaid substantial portion of the loan. He had even repaid amounts which is evident from Exts.P2 and P3, as part of a settlement measure, which according to the petitioner was agreed to by the bank in order to settle the entire liability for Rs.60 lakhs.

¶24

Even though petitioner has not been able to produce any scrap of paper regarding the offer by the bank for settling the entire liability for Rs.60 lakhs, petitioner harps upon the contention that the bank had offered and petitioner had accepted to settle the entire liability for Rs.60 lakhs and that the payments were made in lieu of such settlement.

¶25

W.P.(C)No.16940 of 2021

¶26

¶27

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the third respondent denying such settlement as offered by the bank. In spite of such denial, the third respondent has now offered to settle amount for a reasonable sum if the petitioner approaches the bank with such a suitable proposal.

¶28

I have heard the arguments of Adv.Sajan Varghese on behalf of the petitioner as well as Adv. S.Easwaran on behalf of the respondents.

¶29

This Court cannot accede to the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that there was an agreement for settling the loan for Rs.60 lakhs. Therefore, the contention is rejected.

¶30

However, in view of the contentions raised and the pleadings in the case, I find that there is no scrap of paper produced by the petitioner to prove that there was any settlement as propounded by the petitioner. But, taking note of the fact that the petitioner has paid certain amounts towards the loan account and also having regard to the offer of the bank that they are still willing to consider a suitable settlement, provided the petitioner approaches the bank with such a proposal, I am of the view that this writ petition itself can be

¶31

W.P.(C)No.16940 of 2021

¶32

¶33

disposed of. Accordingly, petitioner to directed to approach the third respondent bank with suitable proposals for settling the account and in the event of such proposal being brought in by

¶34

the petitioner, the third respondent shall consider and take a decision on such proposal with all earnestness and sympathetically having regard to the circumstances of the petitioner.

¶35

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶38

AJ/05.10.2021

¶39

W.P.(C)No.16940 of 2021

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16940/2021

¶42

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶43

Exhibit	P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.1.2020 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ON RECEIPT OF MONEY ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ON 30.1.2020.
Exhibit	P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT MADE BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT SHOWING THE RECEIPT OF RS.9 LAKHS, ON 28.2.2020.
Exhibit	P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WHATSAPPED ON 28.3.2020 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P5 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 7.8.2019 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit	P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER ON 24.6.2020 TO THE 5TH PETITIONER.
Exhibit	P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED ON RECEIPT OF MONEY BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P8 TRUE COPY OF THE TERMINATION LETTER DATED 27.7.2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S SON.
Exhibit	P9 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE HOSPITAL, TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit	P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 7.9.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P11 TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN RECEIPTS (FOUR IN NUMBERS SHOWING PAYMENT TOWARDS FOUR LOANS) ISSUED TOGETHER ON 7.12.2020 BY

¶44

W.P.(C)No.16940 of 2021

¶45

¶46

THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

¶47

Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

¶48

Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE BALANCE STATEMENT IN THE ACCOUNT MAINTAINED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER AND HIS WIFE, AT THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK, KODENCHERRY.

¶49

Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7.7.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS NO. 2 TO 6.

¶50

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

¶51

Exhibit R3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/09/2021 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Kuriakose Kp v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuriakose Kp v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E.v.Mathai and Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State Tax Officer(Wc and Lt)

Latha v Vs the Commissioner for Workmen'S Compensation

Titus Joseph Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Zubair v Vs State of Kerala

Aswin Associates Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Cochin Refineries Employees Association Vs Union of India